 In this module, we shall read one page from a book which is written on Islamic financial contracts, a research companion by Dr. Hussain Mukhjuddin Qadri and Nasser Iqbal. We would be reading one page which would be page number 168 from this book. The objective is to let you have an understanding of a topic which is combining contracts in the context of Islamic banking and finance. Let us read this one page from this book. Page 168 of the book starts with prohibition of two mutually contingent contracts. Two mutually contingent and inconsistent contracts are prohibited by the Holy Prophet, peace be upon him. This refers to number one. The sale of two articles in such a way that one who intends to purchase an article is obliged to purchase the other also at any given price. Two, this occurs where one person says to other, I sell you this article at this price on the condition that you sell your house at this price. Three, the sale of a single article for two prices when one of the prices is not finally stipulated at the time of the execution of the sale. This would be an example of Bayul Qarrar which is prohibited. This kind of sale has been understood in two ways. In the first way, one of the two prices is payable in cash and the other is payable later. For example, A says to B, I sell you this commodity for 100 in cash and 150 on credit. In the second way, one of the contracting parties says, I sell this garment cash down for such and such a price on the condition that I will repurchase it after a certain delay at a certain another price. Contingent sale, which is number five, it occurs when a contract is made contingent upon another contract when both are mutually inconsistent. For example, A says to B, I sell you my house if C sells his house to me. Here the completion of the first contract is contingent upon the second contract. Number six, combining sale and lending in one contract. This number six would give rise to Riba. In order to avoid this prohibition, jurists consider it preferable that a contract of sale must relate to only one transaction and different contracts should not be mixed in such a way that the reward and liability of contingent parties involved in a transaction are not fully defined. Therefore, rather than signing a single contract to cover more than one transaction, parties should enter into separate transactions under separate contracts. And this is actually what happens in case of Islamic modes of finance. Islamic banks may come across several transactions in which there could be interdependent agreements or stipulations that have to be avoided. The combination of some contracts is permissible subject to certain conditions. B, sale and Ejara are two contracts of totally different impacts. While ownership and risk are transferred to the buyer in B, neither ownership nor risk transfer from the lesser to the lessy. It is necessary therefore that lease and sale are kept as separate agreements. In Islamic banks, Ejara-Muntahiya-Bitamleek, lease culminating in the transfer of ownership to the lessy, the relationship between the parties throughout the lease period remains that of the lesser and lessy and the bank remains liable for the risks and expenses relating to ownership. Transferring ownership risk to the lessy during the lease period would render the transaction void. However, one of the parties can undertake a unilateral promise to sell, buy or gift the asset at the termination of the lease period. This will not be binding on the other party. I think this is a very good read and this is self-explanatory. I would like you to read like this.